niryuu/sni-each-converted huggingface dataset:
CONTEXT: There's something else to add to the other answers : Vision can't exist without the mind stone. So to bring him back, you'll need to bring him back with the mind stone on his head, which can't be done if the mind stone is on the gauntlet (as far as we know, even having the 6 stones can't make you create a new stone). So even if resurecting someone was possible, Vision is one of the only creatures in the universe that actually could never be brought back by the stones.  <sep>  Q: Thanos killed Vision in Infinity War to get the Mind Stone. During end game, hulk does "the snap" does this mean that the chracter was brought back? A: Vision can't exist without the mind stone. So to bring him back, you'll need to bring him back with the mind stone on his head  Q: How is this possible? A: as far as we know, even having the 6 stones can't make you create a new stone  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: So Vision wont be able to be brought back to life?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: There's something else to add to the other answers : Vision can't exist without the mind stone. So to bring him back, you'll need to bring him back with the mind stone on his head, which can't be done if the mind stone is on the gauntlet (as far as we know, even having the 6 stones can't make you create a new stone). So even if resurecting someone was possible, Vision is one of the only creatures in the universe that actually could never be brought back by the stones.  <sep>  Q: Is this character still alive after the events of "Avengers: Endgame"?
Output: No
CONTEXT: There's something else to add to the other answers : Vision can't exist without the mind stone. So to bring him back, you'll need to bring him back with the mind stone on his head, which can't be done if the mind stone is on the gauntlet (as far as we know, even having the 6 stones can't make you create a new stone). So even if resurecting someone was possible, Vision is one of the only creatures in the universe that actually could never be brought back by the stones.  <sep>  Q: Thanos killed Vision in Infinity War to get the Mind Stone. During end game, hulk does "the snap" does this mean that the chracter was brought back? A: Vision can't exist without the mind stone. So to bring him back, you'll need to bring him back with the mind stone on his head  Q: How is this possible? A: as far as we know, even having the 6 stones can't make you create a new stone  Q: So Vision wont be able to be brought back to life? A: Vision is one of the only creatures in the universe that actually could never be brought back by the stones  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there anything else you can tell me?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Well, in answer to the first part: Yes, the water in which John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor) was swimming/bathing when Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) came up to him is irradiated. Without getting too "spoilery", the area in which Ann lives seems to be one of very few (if not the only) radiation-free zones at the time of the story. However, the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall). As for the beneficial effects of the bath, I think the link to the "Silkwood Shower" reference by @Will-Feldman is probably as good an explanation as any. Try to get as much of the irradiated water off of the body as possible. John is obviously still going to be affected by his exposure, but there's no reason to allow more of the radiation to seep in if it can be prevented.  <sep>  Q: Why does Margot Robbie wash Chiwetel Ejiofor in Z for Zachariah?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Well, in answer to the first part: Yes, the water in which John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor) was swimming/bathing when Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) came up to him is irradiated. Without getting too "spoilery", the area in which Ann lives seems to be one of very few (if not the only) radiation-free zones at the time of the story. However, the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall). As for the beneficial effects of the bath, I think the link to the "Silkwood Shower" reference by @Will-Feldman is probably as good an explanation as any. Try to get as much of the irradiated water off of the body as possible. John is obviously still going to be affected by his exposure, but there's no reason to allow more of the radiation to seep in if it can be prevented.  <sep>  Q: Why does Margot Robbie wash Chiwetel Ejiofor in Z for Zachariah? A: the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there radiation in the water?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Well, in answer to the first part: Yes, the water in which John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor) was swimming/bathing when Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) came up to him is irradiated. Without getting too "spoilery", the area in which Ann lives seems to be one of very few (if not the only) radiation-free zones at the time of the story. However, the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall). As for the beneficial effects of the bath, I think the link to the "Silkwood Shower" reference by @Will-Feldman is probably as good an explanation as any. Try to get as much of the irradiated water off of the body as possible. John is obviously still going to be affected by his exposure, but there's no reason to allow more of the radiation to seep in if it can be prevented.  <sep>  Q: Why does Margot Robbie wash Chiwetel Ejiofor in Z for Zachariah? A: the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall  Q: Is there radiation in the water? A: irradiated  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What does irradiated mean?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Well, in answer to the first part: Yes, the water in which John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor) was swimming/bathing when Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) came up to him is irradiated. Without getting too "spoilery", the area in which Ann lives seems to be one of very few (if not the only) radiation-free zones at the time of the story. However, the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall). As for the beneficial effects of the bath, I think the link to the "Silkwood Shower" reference by @Will-Feldman is probably as good an explanation as any. Try to get as much of the irradiated water off of the body as possible. John is obviously still going to be affected by his exposure, but there's no reason to allow more of the radiation to seep in if it can be prevented.  <sep>  Q: Why does Margot Robbie wash Chiwetel Ejiofor in Z for Zachariah? A: the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall  Q: Is there radiation in the water? A: irradiated  Q: What does irradiated mean? A: irradiated  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Does Margo have to wash anyone else?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Well, in answer to the first part: Yes, the water in which John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor) was swimming/bathing when Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) came up to him is irradiated. Without getting too "spoilery", the area in which Ann lives seems to be one of very few (if not the only) radiation-free zones at the time of the story. However, the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall). As for the beneficial effects of the bath, I think the link to the "Silkwood Shower" reference by @Will-Feldman is probably as good an explanation as any. Try to get as much of the irradiated water off of the body as possible. John is obviously still going to be affected by his exposure, but there's no reason to allow more of the radiation to seep in if it can be prevented.  <sep>  Q: Why does Margot Robbie wash Chiwetel Ejiofor in Z for Zachariah? A: the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall  Q: Is there radiation in the water? A: irradiated  Q: What does irradiated mean? A: irradiated  Q: Does Margo have to wash anyone else? A: John  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What happens after Margot washes Chiwetel?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Well, in answer to the first part: Yes, the water in which John Loomis (Chiwetel Ejiofor) was swimming/bathing when Ann Burden (Margot Robbie) came up to him is irradiated. Without getting too "spoilery", the area in which Ann lives seems to be one of very few (if not the only) radiation-free zones at the time of the story. However, the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall). As for the beneficial effects of the bath, I think the link to the "Silkwood Shower" reference by @Will-Feldman is probably as good an explanation as any. Try to get as much of the irradiated water off of the body as possible. John is obviously still going to be affected by his exposure, but there's no reason to allow more of the radiation to seep in if it can be prevented.  <sep>  Q: Why does Margot Robbie wash Chiwetel Ejiofor in Z for Zachariah? A: the water in which John was swimming comes from outside of that area (the waterfall  Q: Is there radiation in the water? A: irradiated  Q: What does irradiated mean? A: irradiated  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Will scrubbing protect you from the radiation?
Output: No
CONTEXT: I haven't seen the show in a while and don't have any references handy but as i recall Louis wasn't as cool and liked by others like Harvey was. Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey. So Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward. Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis. Overall depending on how you define winner or best either one of them could be worthy of those titles. You seem to view their balance sheet as the arbitrator of success, and not professional achievement in the form of being managing partner. In all reality Louis had enough money to maintain his lifestyle if he quit getting a paycheck, unlike Harvey. However, as portrayed in the show becoming managing partner and mastering the relevant politics to become the de facto leader was the holy grail. Harvey was always closer than Louis in attaining this goal, making Harvey the better man in terms of the show like it or not.  <sep>  Q: Why does Louis Litt struggle with self-esteem issues, given that he is the richest in the law firm despite getting a lower salary?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I haven't seen the show in a while and don't have any references handy but as i recall Louis wasn't as cool and liked by others like Harvey was. Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey. So Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward. Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis. Overall depending on how you define winner or best either one of them could be worthy of those titles. You seem to view their balance sheet as the arbitrator of success, and not professional achievement in the form of being managing partner. In all reality Louis had enough money to maintain his lifestyle if he quit getting a paycheck, unlike Harvey. However, as portrayed in the show becoming managing partner and mastering the relevant politics to become the de facto leader was the holy grail. Harvey was always closer than Louis in attaining this goal, making Harvey the better man in terms of the show like it or not.  <sep>  Q: Why does Louis Litt struggle with self-esteem issues, given that he is the richest in the law firm despite getting a lower salary? A: Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why does he feel more inferior to Harvey?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I haven't seen the show in a while and don't have any references handy but as i recall Louis wasn't as cool and liked by others like Harvey was. Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey. So Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward. Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis. Overall depending on how you define winner or best either one of them could be worthy of those titles. You seem to view their balance sheet as the arbitrator of success, and not professional achievement in the form of being managing partner. In all reality Louis had enough money to maintain his lifestyle if he quit getting a paycheck, unlike Harvey. However, as portrayed in the show becoming managing partner and mastering the relevant politics to become the de facto leader was the holy grail. Harvey was always closer than Louis in attaining this goal, making Harvey the better man in terms of the show like it or not.  <sep>  Q: Why does Louis Litt struggle with self-esteem issues, given that he is the richest in the law firm despite getting a lower salary? A: Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward  Q: Why does he feel more inferior to Harvey? A: Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How was it discovered that Louis was the richest person in the law firm?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I haven't seen the show in a while and don't have any references handy but as i recall Louis wasn't as cool and liked by others like Harvey was. Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey. So Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward. Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis. Overall depending on how you define winner or best either one of them could be worthy of those titles. You seem to view their balance sheet as the arbitrator of success, and not professional achievement in the form of being managing partner. In all reality Louis had enough money to maintain his lifestyle if he quit getting a paycheck, unlike Harvey. However, as portrayed in the show becoming managing partner and mastering the relevant politics to become the de facto leader was the holy grail. Harvey was always closer than Louis in attaining this goal, making Harvey the better man in terms of the show like it or not.  <sep>  Q: Why does Louis Litt struggle with self-esteem issues, given that he is the richest in the law firm despite getting a lower salary? A: Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward  Q: Why does he feel more inferior to Harvey? A: Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey  Q: How was it discovered that Louis was the richest person in the law firm? A: he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why were his bosses embarrassed to find out how rich he was?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I haven't seen the show in a while and don't have any references handy but as i recall Louis wasn't as cool and liked by others like Harvey was. Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey. So Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward. Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis. Overall depending on how you define winner or best either one of them could be worthy of those titles. You seem to view their balance sheet as the arbitrator of success, and not professional achievement in the form of being managing partner. In all reality Louis had enough money to maintain his lifestyle if he quit getting a paycheck, unlike Harvey. However, as portrayed in the show becoming managing partner and mastering the relevant politics to become the de facto leader was the holy grail. Harvey was always closer than Louis in attaining this goal, making Harvey the better man in terms of the show like it or not.  <sep>  Q: Why does Louis Litt struggle with self-esteem issues, given that he is the richest in the law firm despite getting a lower salary? A: Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward  Q: Why does he feel more inferior to Harvey? A: Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did Louis struggle with interoffice politics?
Output: No
CONTEXT: I haven't seen the show in a while and don't have any references handy but as i recall Louis wasn't as cool and liked by others like Harvey was. Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey. So Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward. Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis. Overall depending on how you define winner or best either one of them could be worthy of those titles. You seem to view their balance sheet as the arbitrator of success, and not professional achievement in the form of being managing partner. In all reality Louis had enough money to maintain his lifestyle if he quit getting a paycheck, unlike Harvey. However, as portrayed in the show becoming managing partner and mastering the relevant politics to become the de facto leader was the holy grail. Harvey was always closer than Louis in attaining this goal, making Harvey the better man in terms of the show like it or not.  <sep>  Q: Why does Louis Litt struggle with self-esteem issues, given that he is the richest in the law firm despite getting a lower salary? A: Louis's personality made it hard for him to have the professional successes that Harvey enjoyed but that same personality made it easy for him to be a good financial steward  Q: Why does he feel more inferior to Harvey? A: Louis was always recognized as good at his job but he was never part of the in crowd, and failed at the interoffice politics necessary to rise as quickly and be as prominent as Harvey  Q: How was it discovered that Louis was the richest person in the law firm? A: he earned but his charisma allowed him to do better in the office politics of the firm leading to more professional success but a worse financial position than Louis  Q: Why were his bosses embarrassed to find out how rich he was? A: Harvey on the other hand was careless with the money  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Was Jessica careless with money also?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him. Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him. At this point the relation between Ada and Baine is highly asymmetric: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine.  <sep>  Q: Who plays the piano, Ada or Baine?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him. Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him. At this point the relation between Ada and Baine is highly asymmetric: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine.  <sep>  Q: What is the meaning of this conversation before making love?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him. Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him. At this point the relation between Ada and Baine is highly asymmetric: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine.  <sep>  Q: What is the meaning of this conversation before making love? A: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What is The Piano?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him. Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him. At this point the relation between Ada and Baine is highly asymmetric: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine.  <sep>  Q: What is the meaning of this conversation before making love? A: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Who are Ada and Baine?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him. Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him. At this point the relation between Ada and Baine is highly asymmetric: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine.  <sep>  Q: What is the meaning of this conversation before making love? A: Baine desires Ada, Ada desires her piano. Only later does Ada fall in love with Baine  Q: What is The Piano? A: Ada buys back the piano one key at a time by playing for him  Q: What is making love? A: Making love to him counts for ten times playing for him  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What happens when two people make love?
Output: No
CONTEXT: I have not seen the movie so I have not seen the tools themselves. However operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills. Tools designed for operations are designed to be very controllable in terms of speeds and the cutting implements themselves are made of high quality materials to prevent contamination, and can be autoclaved to be sterilized (using high pressure and temperature) but essentially they are not that far removed from hardware tools. In terms of being awake during surgery. The main reason to anaesthetise a patient in an operation is to prevent the pain and stop any movement which would disturb the operation. The scalp itself has pain receptors but the brain has none, once the work has progressed into the brain itself no pain from that part would be felt, but with a local topical anaesthetic the scalp might not be too painful. One could imagine that you could be awake but not be in much discomfort in a brain operation.  <sep>  Q: Is the brain sequence similar to reality or not?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have not seen the movie so I have not seen the tools themselves. However operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills. Tools designed for operations are designed to be very controllable in terms of speeds and the cutting implements themselves are made of high quality materials to prevent contamination, and can be autoclaved to be sterilized (using high pressure and temperature) but essentially they are not that far removed from hardware tools. In terms of being awake during surgery. The main reason to anaesthetise a patient in an operation is to prevent the pain and stop any movement which would disturb the operation. The scalp itself has pain receptors but the brain has none, once the work has progressed into the brain itself no pain from that part would be felt, but with a local topical anaesthetic the scalp might not be too painful. One could imagine that you could be awake but not be in much discomfort in a brain operation.  <sep>  Q: Is the brain sequence similar to reality or not? A: operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How can a person speak during his open brain surgery?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have not seen the movie so I have not seen the tools themselves. However operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills. Tools designed for operations are designed to be very controllable in terms of speeds and the cutting implements themselves are made of high quality materials to prevent contamination, and can be autoclaved to be sterilized (using high pressure and temperature) but essentially they are not that far removed from hardware tools. In terms of being awake during surgery. The main reason to anaesthetise a patient in an operation is to prevent the pain and stop any movement which would disturb the operation. The scalp itself has pain receptors but the brain has none, once the work has progressed into the brain itself no pain from that part would be felt, but with a local topical anaesthetic the scalp might not be too painful. One could imagine that you could be awake but not be in much discomfort in a brain operation.  <sep>  Q: Is the brain sequence similar to reality or not? A: operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills  Q: How can a person speak during his open brain surgery? A: The scalp itself has pain receptors but the brain has none, once the work has progressed into the brain itself no pain from that part would be felt  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How can they perform an operation where hardware tools are used rather than medical instruments?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: I have not seen the movie so I have not seen the tools themselves. However operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills. Tools designed for operations are designed to be very controllable in terms of speeds and the cutting implements themselves are made of high quality materials to prevent contamination, and can be autoclaved to be sterilized (using high pressure and temperature) but essentially they are not that far removed from hardware tools. In terms of being awake during surgery. The main reason to anaesthetise a patient in an operation is to prevent the pain and stop any movement which would disturb the operation. The scalp itself has pain receptors but the brain has none, once the work has progressed into the brain itself no pain from that part would be felt, but with a local topical anaesthetic the scalp might not be too painful. One could imagine that you could be awake but not be in much discomfort in a brain operation.  <sep>  Q: Is the brain sequence similar to reality or not? A: operations which require cutting bone often require tools which might at first glance look like conventional power tools, such as drills  Q: How can a person speak during his open brain surgery? A: The scalp itself has pain receptors but the brain has none, once the work has progressed into the brain itself no pain from that part would be felt  Q: How can they perform an operation where hardware tools are used rather than medical instruments? A: Tools designed for operations are designed to be very controllable in terms of speeds and the cutting implements themselves are made of high quality materials to prevent contamination  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: But, is there any similarity between this operation sequence and reality?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: IMDb credits are generated by the filmmakers themselves (for smaller, independent productions) or representatives for the filmmakers/producers. On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form. I speak from experience as I appear as three different entities on IMDb because the filmmakers I worked for neglected to see if I was already represented and created a new page for me each time. This is certainly the case with other actors/crew members, and could go some way to explaining the discrepancies you have discovered. Bottom line is IMDb is not infallible, and it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites in order to confirm the actor you are researching is the right one.  <sep>  Q: How to correctly identify an actor/actresses is in something that is not listed on their IMDB profile?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: IMDb credits are generated by the filmmakers themselves (for smaller, independent productions) or representatives for the filmmakers/producers. On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form. I speak from experience as I appear as three different entities on IMDb because the filmmakers I worked for neglected to see if I was already represented and created a new page for me each time. This is certainly the case with other actors/crew members, and could go some way to explaining the discrepancies you have discovered. Bottom line is IMDb is not infallible, and it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites in order to confirm the actor you are researching is the right one.  <sep>  Q: How to correctly identify an actor/actresses is in something that is not listed on their IMDB profile? A: it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: If it's not listed on IMDB or their wiki page, then how can i make sure if the actor/actress is the one I believe they are?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: IMDb credits are generated by the filmmakers themselves (for smaller, independent productions) or representatives for the filmmakers/producers. On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form. I speak from experience as I appear as three different entities on IMDb because the filmmakers I worked for neglected to see if I was already represented and created a new page for me each time. This is certainly the case with other actors/crew members, and could go some way to explaining the discrepancies you have discovered. Bottom line is IMDb is not infallible, and it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites in order to confirm the actor you are researching is the right one.  <sep>  Q: How to correctly identify an actor/actresses is in something that is not listed on their IMDB profile? A: it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites  Q: If it's not listed on IMDB or their wiki page, then how can i make sure if the actor/actress is the one I believe they are? A: On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: And where would I check?
Output: No
CONTEXT: Regardless of whether Sully is the only one that has a real nose, Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar. Taking off noses makes them distinctly non-mammalian, and makes the world monstrous instead of just populated with animals. Sully, however, has to walk the line between a teddy bear and a blue Sasquatch so that Boo can both be terrified of him and grow to love him. The nose and the shaggy fur make him look approachable to both Boo and little kids in the audience.  <sep>  Q: Why is Sulley the only monster in the Monsters Inc films to have a nose?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Regardless of whether Sully is the only one that has a real nose, Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar. Taking off noses makes them distinctly non-mammalian, and makes the world monstrous instead of just populated with animals. Sully, however, has to walk the line between a teddy bear and a blue Sasquatch so that Boo can both be terrified of him and grow to love him. The nose and the shaggy fur make him look approachable to both Boo and little kids in the audience.  <sep>  Q: Why is Sulley the only monster in the Monsters Inc films to have a nose? A: Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Did they do anything else to make them look less human?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Regardless of whether Sully is the only one that has a real nose, Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar. Taking off noses makes them distinctly non-mammalian, and makes the world monstrous instead of just populated with animals. Sully, however, has to walk the line between a teddy bear and a blue Sasquatch so that Boo can both be terrified of him and grow to love him. The nose and the shaggy fur make him look approachable to both Boo and little kids in the audience.  <sep>  Q: Why is Sulley the only monster in the Monsters Inc films to have a nose? A: Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar  Q: Did they do anything else to make them look less human? A: aking off noses makes them distinctly non-mammalian, and makes the world monstrous instead of just populated with animals  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did Sully have a nose then?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Regardless of whether Sully is the only one that has a real nose, Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar. Taking off noses makes them distinctly non-mammalian, and makes the world monstrous instead of just populated with animals. Sully, however, has to walk the line between a teddy bear and a blue Sasquatch so that Boo can both be terrified of him and grow to love him. The nose and the shaggy fur make him look approachable to both Boo and little kids in the audience.  <sep>  Q: Why is Sulley the only monster in the Monsters Inc films to have a nose? A: Pixar did minimize noses for a reason, as discussed in the question comments. The monsters are meant to look inhuman and unfamiliar  Q: Did they do anything else to make them look less human? A: aking off noses makes them distinctly non-mammalian, and makes the world monstrous instead of just populated with animals  Q: Why did Sully have a nose then? A: Sully, however, has to walk the line between a teddy bear and a blue Sasquatch so that Boo can both be terrified of him and grow to love him  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is there anything else about Sully I should know?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Let us assume that the love that Persephone once enjoyed was with Merovingian. Merovingian and Persephone have slightly more human traits than other programs, they enjoy fine food, wine, languages. While Persephone talks of love, Merovingian displays lust ("The lipstick that is not on Merovingian's face"). Merovingian is shown to cheat on Persephone. Surprisingly, he uses a special code to trigger sexual reactions in a woman and gets serviced by her! Persephone's envy leads her to give Neo and gang the Key Maker's location. The Oracle mentions Merovingian to be the oldest of them, a powerful program. No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness. Their initial purpose is not mentioned, but the period of love that Persephone mentions is when they went rogue. Merovingian controls the virtual afterlife through the train-man program. This is where exiled programs seek refuge. Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection. Once a program has served its purpose it needs to be de-allocated from the computing resource pool. (Eg: JVM provided by Java has a Garbage Collector which does a clean up periodically). The program Persephone was perhaps a supporting function to this Programmatic Garbage Collection, which is how they met.  <sep>  Q: What were the origins of Persephone in The Matrix: Reloaded?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Let us assume that the love that Persephone once enjoyed was with Merovingian. Merovingian and Persephone have slightly more human traits than other programs, they enjoy fine food, wine, languages. While Persephone talks of love, Merovingian displays lust ("The lipstick that is not on Merovingian's face"). Merovingian is shown to cheat on Persephone. Surprisingly, he uses a special code to trigger sexual reactions in a woman and gets serviced by her! Persephone's envy leads her to give Neo and gang the Key Maker's location. The Oracle mentions Merovingian to be the oldest of them, a powerful program. No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness. Their initial purpose is not mentioned, but the period of love that Persephone mentions is when they went rogue. Merovingian controls the virtual afterlife through the train-man program. This is where exiled programs seek refuge. Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection. Once a program has served its purpose it needs to be de-allocated from the computing resource pool. (Eg: JVM provided by Java has a Garbage Collector which does a clean up periodically). The program Persephone was perhaps a supporting function to this Programmatic Garbage Collection, which is how they met.  <sep>  Q: What were the origins of Persephone in The Matrix: Reloaded? A: Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why would they create a program with no use?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Let us assume that the love that Persephone once enjoyed was with Merovingian. Merovingian and Persephone have slightly more human traits than other programs, they enjoy fine food, wine, languages. While Persephone talks of love, Merovingian displays lust ("The lipstick that is not on Merovingian's face"). Merovingian is shown to cheat on Persephone. Surprisingly, he uses a special code to trigger sexual reactions in a woman and gets serviced by her! Persephone's envy leads her to give Neo and gang the Key Maker's location. The Oracle mentions Merovingian to be the oldest of them, a powerful program. No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness. Their initial purpose is not mentioned, but the period of love that Persephone mentions is when they went rogue. Merovingian controls the virtual afterlife through the train-man program. This is where exiled programs seek refuge. Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection. Once a program has served its purpose it needs to be de-allocated from the computing resource pool. (Eg: JVM provided by Java has a Garbage Collector which does a clean up periodically). The program Persephone was perhaps a supporting function to this Programmatic Garbage Collection, which is how they met.  <sep>  Q: What were the origins of Persephone in The Matrix: Reloaded? A: Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection  Q: Why would they create a program with no use? A: No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Are there any other characters in the matrix that are similar?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Let us assume that the love that Persephone once enjoyed was with Merovingian. Merovingian and Persephone have slightly more human traits than other programs, they enjoy fine food, wine, languages. While Persephone talks of love, Merovingian displays lust ("The lipstick that is not on Merovingian's face"). Merovingian is shown to cheat on Persephone. Surprisingly, he uses a special code to trigger sexual reactions in a woman and gets serviced by her! Persephone's envy leads her to give Neo and gang the Key Maker's location. The Oracle mentions Merovingian to be the oldest of them, a powerful program. No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness. Their initial purpose is not mentioned, but the period of love that Persephone mentions is when they went rogue. Merovingian controls the virtual afterlife through the train-man program. This is where exiled programs seek refuge. Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection. Once a program has served its purpose it needs to be de-allocated from the computing resource pool. (Eg: JVM provided by Java has a Garbage Collector which does a clean up periodically). The program Persephone was perhaps a supporting function to this Programmatic Garbage Collection, which is how they met.  <sep>  Q: What were the origins of Persephone in The Matrix: Reloaded? A: Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection  Q: Why would they create a program with no use? A: No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  Q: Are there any other characters in the matrix that are similar? A: Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What does the name persephone mean?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: Let us assume that the love that Persephone once enjoyed was with Merovingian. Merovingian and Persephone have slightly more human traits than other programs, they enjoy fine food, wine, languages. While Persephone talks of love, Merovingian displays lust ("The lipstick that is not on Merovingian's face"). Merovingian is shown to cheat on Persephone. Surprisingly, he uses a special code to trigger sexual reactions in a woman and gets serviced by her! Persephone's envy leads her to give Neo and gang the Key Maker's location. The Oracle mentions Merovingian to be the oldest of them, a powerful program. No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness. Their initial purpose is not mentioned, but the period of love that Persephone mentions is when they went rogue. Merovingian controls the virtual afterlife through the train-man program. This is where exiled programs seek refuge. Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection. Once a program has served its purpose it needs to be de-allocated from the computing resource pool. (Eg: JVM provided by Java has a Garbage Collector which does a clean up periodically). The program Persephone was perhaps a supporting function to this Programmatic Garbage Collection, which is how they met.  <sep>  Q: What were the origins of Persephone in The Matrix: Reloaded? A: Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection  Q: Why would they create a program with no use? A: No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  Q: Are there any other characters in the matrix that are similar? A: Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: When did the movie The matrix: reloaded come out
Output: No
CONTEXT: Let us assume that the love that Persephone once enjoyed was with Merovingian. Merovingian and Persephone have slightly more human traits than other programs, they enjoy fine food, wine, languages. While Persephone talks of love, Merovingian displays lust ("The lipstick that is not on Merovingian's face"). Merovingian is shown to cheat on Persephone. Surprisingly, he uses a special code to trigger sexual reactions in a woman and gets serviced by her! Persephone's envy leads her to give Neo and gang the Key Maker's location. The Oracle mentions Merovingian to be the oldest of them, a powerful program. No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness. Their initial purpose is not mentioned, but the period of love that Persephone mentions is when they went rogue. Merovingian controls the virtual afterlife through the train-man program. This is where exiled programs seek refuge. Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection. Once a program has served its purpose it needs to be de-allocated from the computing resource pool. (Eg: JVM provided by Java has a Garbage Collector which does a clean up periodically). The program Persephone was perhaps a supporting function to this Programmatic Garbage Collection, which is how they met.  <sep>  Q: What were the origins of Persephone in The Matrix: Reloaded? A: Though this is the current operation, perhaps in the beginning, Merovingian was created with the purpose of Programmatic Garbage Collection  Q: Why would they create a program with no use? A: No program other than the Oracle has the purpose to be human like. The fact that Merovingian and Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  Q: Are there any other characters in the matrix that are similar? A: Persephone turn human-like is them exhibiting programmatic roguishness  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: How long is the movie the matrix : reloaded
Output: No
CONTEXT: It seems as though you answered your own questions, and that's the answer I was going to give: Caleb knew (or suspected) that Nathan had heard his conversations with Ava. If Caleb hadn't tried to get Nathan drunk that morning, Nathan would have known that Caleb ALREADY completed his plan, and he would have undone the computer code that Caleb altered.  <sep>  Q: Was Nathan listening in on his conversations with Ava? A: Nathan had heard his conversations with Ava  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What were the conversations about?
Output: Yes
CONTEXT: It seems as though you answered your own questions, and that's the answer I was going to give: Caleb knew (or suspected) that Nathan had heard his conversations with Ava. If Caleb hadn't tried to get Nathan drunk that morning, Nathan would have known that Caleb ALREADY completed his plan, and he would have undone the computer code that Caleb altered.  <sep>  Q: Was Nathan listening in on his conversations with Ava? A: Nathan had heard his conversations with Ava  Q: What were the conversations about? A: the computer code that Caleb altered  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why did he alter it?
Output: Yes